03-03-2006, 03:17 PM
I WANTED TO ADD SOMETHING IN THIS THREAD. WRONGLY I HAVE ADDED IT IN WHO IS A HINDU.
HOWEVER LET ME PUT FORTH SOME OTHER POINTS I WISH TO SHARE.
IN THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS I CAME ACROSS A POINT THAT "ALLAH" AND "CHRIST" ARE KEPT AT PAR BY "ISCKON" BUT LORD SHIVA IS TERMED AS DEMIGOD.
MAY BE THIS MAY BE THEIR OPINION. BUT ONE THING IS CLEAR. NO VAIDIK SCHOOL OF THOUGHT BE IT VISHISHTADWAITHI OR DWAITI WOULD SUBSCRIBE TO THIS DEROGATORY THOUGHT.
WE THE TRADITIONAL SANATHANI FOLLOWERS OF DHARMA VIEW THE DIFFERENT SAMPRADAYAS ON THE MERITS OF EACH.
OFCOURSE THE IDEOLOGIES OF EACH SAMPRADAYA DIFFER.
BUT WE CRITICISE THAT PART OF IDEOLOGY WHICH DIFFER FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW AT THE SAME TIME APPRECIATING THE COMMONALITIES.
LIKE "ISCKON" PEOPLE DOES NOT LIKE ADVAITA. OR THEY FEEL THAT THEIR PHILOSOPHY IS DIFFERENT FROM ADVAITA. THE HONEST WAY OF SAYING IT IS THAT WE DONT ACCEPT ADVAITA. OUR PHILOSOPHY IS DIFFERENT.
TO GIVE A CONCOCTED NAME OF "MAYAVADA" TO "ADVAITA" PHILOSOPHY AND THEN START DISPROVE WHAT U UNDERSTAND AS "ADVAITA" IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG.
"ADVAITINS" SAY "BRAHMA SATYA" "GAGAT MITYA".
I VERY HUMBLY FEEL THAT THIS IS A PHILOSOPHICAL STATEMENT.
PRACTICAL PRONOUNCEMENT OF THS STATEMENT CATCH WEIGHTAGE WHEN THE CORRECT "ADHIKARI" SAYS IT.
LIKE WHEN PRAHLADA SAID "I SEE BHAGAWAN EVERY WHERE", EVERY CHETANA AND ACHETANA OBJECT WERE NOT SO AS SUCH TO HIM BUT THEY WERE ALL "BHAGAWAN"
BUT HIRANYAKASHIPU SAID "STHAMBE NA DRUSHYATE" IT WAS TRUE FOR HIM.
BUT MATTER OF FACT IS PRAHLADA, ME, ONE AND ALL PARTICIPATNG IN THIS DISCUSSION FOR ONE THING WOULD AGREE THAT THE VASTHU U CALL AS OMNIPRESENT - U CALL IT AS - BHAGAWAN, LORD KRISHNA - BRAHMA VASTHU - ET ALL. IT IS OMNI PRESENT.
FOR PRAHLADA THE STHAMBA WAS BHAGAWAN AND FOR HIRANYAKASHIPU IT WAS STHAMBA.
SIMILARLY WHEN ADVAITINS SAY "BRAHMA SATYA" AND "JAGAT MITYA" THEY ARE ON THE SIDE OF PRAHLADA AND WHEN SOMEBODY HEAPS ABUSES ON "ADVAITINS" BECAUSE OF THE FACT THEY SAY THAT "JAGAT IS MITYA" AM SORRY TO SAY THEY ARE ON THE SIDE OF HIRANYAKASHIPU.
HAVING SAID THIS IT IS NOT THAT WE DO NOT DISAPPROVE THE GOOD DEEDS OF ISCKON. TRUE TO KALAU KESHAVA KEEERTHANATH, THEY ARE DOING NAMAPRACHARA SELFLESSLY.
MAY BE DUE TO WESTERN INFLUENCE, THE ORGANISATION IS THESE DAYS WRONGLY BLOSSOMING WITH HATE THOUGHTS. HATE THOUGHT ARISES NOT OUT OF LOVE FOR ONE'S OWN IDEOLOGY BUT BECAUSE OF EGO. A PERSON FILLED WITH HATE THOUGHTS BELONGING TO ANY IDEOLOGY IS IN FACT A DISGUISED FOLLOWER OF OPPONENT IDEOLOGY. BECAUSE RATHER THAN FOCUSSING HIS THOUGHTS ON THE BEAUTY OF HIS OWN IDEOLOGY, HE ALWAYS FOCUSSES HIS THOUGHTS ON THE PERCEIVED - I AGAIN STRESS - PERCEIVED DEMERITS OF OPPONENT IDEOLOGY. LIKE KAMSA.
KAMSA WAS AN OPPONENT OF KRISHNA. BUT HE SPENT MORE TIME ON THINKING OF KRISHNA - MORE THAN THAT OF ANY FOLLOWER OF ISCKON. HE WAS INCLUDED IN THE LIST OF PEOPLE WHO ATTAINED BHAGAWAT SAYUJYA WHICH IS TOLD IN BHAGAWATHA "BHAYATH KAMSAHA".
HAVIG SAID ALL THIS, I LOVINGLY READ THE "GRANTHAS" OF GOWDIYA VAISHNAVAS. "BRHAD BHAGAVATHA KATHAMRTHAM", "UJJWALA NEELAMANI", "GOPALA CHAMPU"AND MANY OTHER. ALTHOUGH I DO NOT BELONG TO ISCKON SAMPRADAYA I FEEL NOTHING WRONG IN GOING THROUGH THESE GREAT WORKS OF EARLY GOWDIYA VAISHNAVA ACHARYAS WHO WERE MEN OF COMPASSION, HUMILITY, BENEVOLENCE FAR DIFFERENT FROM THE SET OF ARROGANT ( I AM REALLY SORRY TO SAY THIS) SELF STYLED GURUS OF CURRENT DAY ISCKON WHO SITTING ON ROOFTOP SAY THAT ALLAH AND CHRIST ARE ONE AND THE SAME AS KRISHNA BUT THOSE WHO ARE WORSHIPPING DEMI GODS LIKE LORD SHIVA ARE SINFUL ENTITIES AND DOOMED.
ANOTHER CONTROVERSIAL PIECE I UNFORTUNATELY PICKED ON SURFING ISCKON SITE WAS THE ABUSES THEY HEAP ON PUJYA HITAHARIVAMSA OF RADHA VALLABHA SAMPRADAYA.
ISCKON GIVES ITS OWN ABUSIVE VERSION OF STORY OF LIFE AND TIMES OF HITAHARI VAMSA. THE SITE SAYS HE WAS SCOLDED BY THEIR LIENEAGE OF ACHARYAS SINCE HE TOOK THAMBOOLA CHARVANAM ON EKADASHI DAYS AND HE WAS DRIVEN OUT OF GOWDIYA SAMPRADAYA. THEY GO ON TO SAY THAT "RADHA RASASUDANIDHI" - A GRANTHA PRESUMED TO BE AUTHORED BY SHRI.HITAHARIVAMSA WAS NOT AUTHORED BY HIM. ISCKON PEOPLE CLAIMS THAT THIS WAS AUTHORED BY "VENKATABATTA GOSWAMI" A RELATVE OF "GOPALA BATTA GOSWAMI".
NOW MY HUMBLE OBSERVATION IS THIS SORT OF NAME CALLING AND CONCOCTED PRESENTATION OF LIFE AND TIMES OF PEOPLE PERCEIVED AS GREAT BY A GOOD LOT OF PEOPLE IS PURELY WESTERN STYLE. THIS SORTS OF THINGS U CAN IMAGINE BETWEEN A SHIA AND SUNNI. A CATHOLIC AND PROTESTENT OR ORTHODOX CHURCH. NOT BETWEEN ADVAITI VS. VISHISHTADWAITI VS. DWAITI VS. ANY BRHMO SAMAJI VS. ANY ARYA SAMAJI OR ANY BHARATHIYA SANSKRTHIC IDEOLOGISTS. HERE WE DIFFER ONLY IN IDEOLOGICAL MOORINGS AT THE SAME TIME KEEPING SAINTS AND SCHOLARS AT A HIGHER PEDESTAL. BE IT SHANKARACHARYA, RAMANUJA, MADHWACHARYA, VALLABACHARYA, NIMBARKACHARYA, CHAITANYA MAHAPRABHU, KABIR, RAHIM, RASKAN, RAVI DAS, SENA NAYI, RAMA KRISHNA PARAMA HAMSA, VIVEKANANDA, MAHARISHI DAYANANDA.
NOBODY CRITICISED THE IDEOLOGY OF ANOTHER BY GIVING A DEROGATORY NAME TO THE OPPONENT IDEOLOGY LIKE WHAT ISCKON IS DOING NOW.
WHETHER "RADHA RASA SUDANIDHI" IS WRITTEN BY "VENKATA BATTA GOSWAMI" OR "HITA HARIVAMSA" IS IMMATERIAL TO ME. THE GRANTHA IS A NECTAR FOR ANY BHAKTHA WHO WORSHIP RADHA KRISHNA YUGALAM. RATHER THAN WASTING TIME IN DISPUTING THE HISTORY OF GRANTHA I WOULD REQUEST MY FELLOW ISKCON FRIENDS TO SPEND TIME IN STUDYING THE NECTAR OF "RADHA RASA SUDANIDHI"
I HAVE TRIED TO PUT FORTH MY POINTS IN A MOSTLY HUMBLE MANNER. BUT HAD I SOUNDED ANYWHERE OFFENSIVE OR HURT ANY VAISHNAVA WITHOUT HESITATION I OFFER MY UNCONDITIONAL APOLOGIES.
BECAUSE A BHAKTHA SHOULD NEVER BE IN A POSITION AND SAY SEE I AM THE ONLY TRUE ALL ARE FAKE. WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM THE HISTORY OF CHAITANYA MAHAPRABHU, RUPA GOSWAMI, SANATHANA GOSWAMI, JEEVA GOSWAMI, RAGHUNATHA DASA GOSWAMI, RAGHUNATHA BATTA GOSWAMI AND GOPALA BATTA GOSWAMI IS THAT A BHAKTHA SHOULD ALWAYS HAVE A HUMBLE MINDSET AND ALWAYS CONCENTRATE ON LORD KRISHNA.
LET ME PRAY THEM TO BLESS ME IN SUCH A POSITION.
RADHE KRISHNA
HOWEVER LET ME PUT FORTH SOME OTHER POINTS I WISH TO SHARE.
IN THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS I CAME ACROSS A POINT THAT "ALLAH" AND "CHRIST" ARE KEPT AT PAR BY "ISCKON" BUT LORD SHIVA IS TERMED AS DEMIGOD.
MAY BE THIS MAY BE THEIR OPINION. BUT ONE THING IS CLEAR. NO VAIDIK SCHOOL OF THOUGHT BE IT VISHISHTADWAITHI OR DWAITI WOULD SUBSCRIBE TO THIS DEROGATORY THOUGHT.
WE THE TRADITIONAL SANATHANI FOLLOWERS OF DHARMA VIEW THE DIFFERENT SAMPRADAYAS ON THE MERITS OF EACH.
OFCOURSE THE IDEOLOGIES OF EACH SAMPRADAYA DIFFER.
BUT WE CRITICISE THAT PART OF IDEOLOGY WHICH DIFFER FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW AT THE SAME TIME APPRECIATING THE COMMONALITIES.
LIKE "ISCKON" PEOPLE DOES NOT LIKE ADVAITA. OR THEY FEEL THAT THEIR PHILOSOPHY IS DIFFERENT FROM ADVAITA. THE HONEST WAY OF SAYING IT IS THAT WE DONT ACCEPT ADVAITA. OUR PHILOSOPHY IS DIFFERENT.
TO GIVE A CONCOCTED NAME OF "MAYAVADA" TO "ADVAITA" PHILOSOPHY AND THEN START DISPROVE WHAT U UNDERSTAND AS "ADVAITA" IS ABSOLUTELY WRONG.
"ADVAITINS" SAY "BRAHMA SATYA" "GAGAT MITYA".
I VERY HUMBLY FEEL THAT THIS IS A PHILOSOPHICAL STATEMENT.
PRACTICAL PRONOUNCEMENT OF THS STATEMENT CATCH WEIGHTAGE WHEN THE CORRECT "ADHIKARI" SAYS IT.
LIKE WHEN PRAHLADA SAID "I SEE BHAGAWAN EVERY WHERE", EVERY CHETANA AND ACHETANA OBJECT WERE NOT SO AS SUCH TO HIM BUT THEY WERE ALL "BHAGAWAN"
BUT HIRANYAKASHIPU SAID "STHAMBE NA DRUSHYATE" IT WAS TRUE FOR HIM.
BUT MATTER OF FACT IS PRAHLADA, ME, ONE AND ALL PARTICIPATNG IN THIS DISCUSSION FOR ONE THING WOULD AGREE THAT THE VASTHU U CALL AS OMNIPRESENT - U CALL IT AS - BHAGAWAN, LORD KRISHNA - BRAHMA VASTHU - ET ALL. IT IS OMNI PRESENT.
FOR PRAHLADA THE STHAMBA WAS BHAGAWAN AND FOR HIRANYAKASHIPU IT WAS STHAMBA.
SIMILARLY WHEN ADVAITINS SAY "BRAHMA SATYA" AND "JAGAT MITYA" THEY ARE ON THE SIDE OF PRAHLADA AND WHEN SOMEBODY HEAPS ABUSES ON "ADVAITINS" BECAUSE OF THE FACT THEY SAY THAT "JAGAT IS MITYA" AM SORRY TO SAY THEY ARE ON THE SIDE OF HIRANYAKASHIPU.
HAVING SAID THIS IT IS NOT THAT WE DO NOT DISAPPROVE THE GOOD DEEDS OF ISCKON. TRUE TO KALAU KESHAVA KEEERTHANATH, THEY ARE DOING NAMAPRACHARA SELFLESSLY.
MAY BE DUE TO WESTERN INFLUENCE, THE ORGANISATION IS THESE DAYS WRONGLY BLOSSOMING WITH HATE THOUGHTS. HATE THOUGHT ARISES NOT OUT OF LOVE FOR ONE'S OWN IDEOLOGY BUT BECAUSE OF EGO. A PERSON FILLED WITH HATE THOUGHTS BELONGING TO ANY IDEOLOGY IS IN FACT A DISGUISED FOLLOWER OF OPPONENT IDEOLOGY. BECAUSE RATHER THAN FOCUSSING HIS THOUGHTS ON THE BEAUTY OF HIS OWN IDEOLOGY, HE ALWAYS FOCUSSES HIS THOUGHTS ON THE PERCEIVED - I AGAIN STRESS - PERCEIVED DEMERITS OF OPPONENT IDEOLOGY. LIKE KAMSA.
KAMSA WAS AN OPPONENT OF KRISHNA. BUT HE SPENT MORE TIME ON THINKING OF KRISHNA - MORE THAN THAT OF ANY FOLLOWER OF ISCKON. HE WAS INCLUDED IN THE LIST OF PEOPLE WHO ATTAINED BHAGAWAT SAYUJYA WHICH IS TOLD IN BHAGAWATHA "BHAYATH KAMSAHA".
HAVIG SAID ALL THIS, I LOVINGLY READ THE "GRANTHAS" OF GOWDIYA VAISHNAVAS. "BRHAD BHAGAVATHA KATHAMRTHAM", "UJJWALA NEELAMANI", "GOPALA CHAMPU"AND MANY OTHER. ALTHOUGH I DO NOT BELONG TO ISCKON SAMPRADAYA I FEEL NOTHING WRONG IN GOING THROUGH THESE GREAT WORKS OF EARLY GOWDIYA VAISHNAVA ACHARYAS WHO WERE MEN OF COMPASSION, HUMILITY, BENEVOLENCE FAR DIFFERENT FROM THE SET OF ARROGANT ( I AM REALLY SORRY TO SAY THIS) SELF STYLED GURUS OF CURRENT DAY ISCKON WHO SITTING ON ROOFTOP SAY THAT ALLAH AND CHRIST ARE ONE AND THE SAME AS KRISHNA BUT THOSE WHO ARE WORSHIPPING DEMI GODS LIKE LORD SHIVA ARE SINFUL ENTITIES AND DOOMED.
ANOTHER CONTROVERSIAL PIECE I UNFORTUNATELY PICKED ON SURFING ISCKON SITE WAS THE ABUSES THEY HEAP ON PUJYA HITAHARIVAMSA OF RADHA VALLABHA SAMPRADAYA.
ISCKON GIVES ITS OWN ABUSIVE VERSION OF STORY OF LIFE AND TIMES OF HITAHARI VAMSA. THE SITE SAYS HE WAS SCOLDED BY THEIR LIENEAGE OF ACHARYAS SINCE HE TOOK THAMBOOLA CHARVANAM ON EKADASHI DAYS AND HE WAS DRIVEN OUT OF GOWDIYA SAMPRADAYA. THEY GO ON TO SAY THAT "RADHA RASASUDANIDHI" - A GRANTHA PRESUMED TO BE AUTHORED BY SHRI.HITAHARIVAMSA WAS NOT AUTHORED BY HIM. ISCKON PEOPLE CLAIMS THAT THIS WAS AUTHORED BY "VENKATABATTA GOSWAMI" A RELATVE OF "GOPALA BATTA GOSWAMI".
NOW MY HUMBLE OBSERVATION IS THIS SORT OF NAME CALLING AND CONCOCTED PRESENTATION OF LIFE AND TIMES OF PEOPLE PERCEIVED AS GREAT BY A GOOD LOT OF PEOPLE IS PURELY WESTERN STYLE. THIS SORTS OF THINGS U CAN IMAGINE BETWEEN A SHIA AND SUNNI. A CATHOLIC AND PROTESTENT OR ORTHODOX CHURCH. NOT BETWEEN ADVAITI VS. VISHISHTADWAITI VS. DWAITI VS. ANY BRHMO SAMAJI VS. ANY ARYA SAMAJI OR ANY BHARATHIYA SANSKRTHIC IDEOLOGISTS. HERE WE DIFFER ONLY IN IDEOLOGICAL MOORINGS AT THE SAME TIME KEEPING SAINTS AND SCHOLARS AT A HIGHER PEDESTAL. BE IT SHANKARACHARYA, RAMANUJA, MADHWACHARYA, VALLABACHARYA, NIMBARKACHARYA, CHAITANYA MAHAPRABHU, KABIR, RAHIM, RASKAN, RAVI DAS, SENA NAYI, RAMA KRISHNA PARAMA HAMSA, VIVEKANANDA, MAHARISHI DAYANANDA.
NOBODY CRITICISED THE IDEOLOGY OF ANOTHER BY GIVING A DEROGATORY NAME TO THE OPPONENT IDEOLOGY LIKE WHAT ISCKON IS DOING NOW.
WHETHER "RADHA RASA SUDANIDHI" IS WRITTEN BY "VENKATA BATTA GOSWAMI" OR "HITA HARIVAMSA" IS IMMATERIAL TO ME. THE GRANTHA IS A NECTAR FOR ANY BHAKTHA WHO WORSHIP RADHA KRISHNA YUGALAM. RATHER THAN WASTING TIME IN DISPUTING THE HISTORY OF GRANTHA I WOULD REQUEST MY FELLOW ISKCON FRIENDS TO SPEND TIME IN STUDYING THE NECTAR OF "RADHA RASA SUDANIDHI"
I HAVE TRIED TO PUT FORTH MY POINTS IN A MOSTLY HUMBLE MANNER. BUT HAD I SOUNDED ANYWHERE OFFENSIVE OR HURT ANY VAISHNAVA WITHOUT HESITATION I OFFER MY UNCONDITIONAL APOLOGIES.
BECAUSE A BHAKTHA SHOULD NEVER BE IN A POSITION AND SAY SEE I AM THE ONLY TRUE ALL ARE FAKE. WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM THE HISTORY OF CHAITANYA MAHAPRABHU, RUPA GOSWAMI, SANATHANA GOSWAMI, JEEVA GOSWAMI, RAGHUNATHA DASA GOSWAMI, RAGHUNATHA BATTA GOSWAMI AND GOPALA BATTA GOSWAMI IS THAT A BHAKTHA SHOULD ALWAYS HAVE A HUMBLE MINDSET AND ALWAYS CONCENTRATE ON LORD KRISHNA.
LET ME PRAY THEM TO BLESS ME IN SUCH A POSITION.
RADHE KRISHNA